Learning Project Civil Society Participation and Accountability in Local Governance Processes GOVERNANCE AT GRASSROOTS LEVEL: COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT GROUPS Bhutan: Participatory Forest Management Project (PFMP) Training on Forest Management, Rural Development Training Centre, Zhemgang Liliane Tarnutzer (Key Informant / Case Study) Thimphu, September 2012 2 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Table of Contents 1. Background .................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Context and Power Analysis .......................................................................................................... 4 3. Participation/ Accountability Mechanism(s) ................................................................................... 7 4. Analysis and Main Lessons Learnt .............................................................................................. 10 5. Concluding Remarks.................................................................................................................... 12 6. References ................................................................................................................................... 13 List of Abbreviations BPC Bhutan Power Corporation CBO Community-based Organisation CF Community Forest/Forestry CFMG Community Forest/Forestry Management Group Chiwog Cluster of villages (sub-unit of a Gewog) CSO Civil Society Organisation DFO Divisional Forest Officer DLG Department of Local Governance DoFPS Department of Forests and Park Services DT DzongkhagTshogdu (= District Council) Dzongdag District Governor Dzongrab Deputy District Governor DzFO Dzongkhag Forestry Officer DzFS Dzongkhag Forestry Sector Dzongkhag District FNCA Forest and Nature Conservation Act FNCR Forest and Nature Conservation Rules FYP Five Year Plan Gewog Block (sub-unit of a Dzongkhag) GFEO Gewog Forestry Extension Officer GT GewogTshogde (= Block Council) Gup Block Head (elected) LG Local Government (District and Block levels) Mangmi Deputy Block Head (elected) MoAF Ministry of Agriculture and Forests MoHCA Ministry of Home and Cultural Affairs MoWHS Ministry of Works and Human Settlement 3 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ MP Member of Parliament NWFP Non Wood Forest Product NRDCL Natural Resources Development Corporation Ltd PFMP Participatory Forest Management Project PM Park Manager SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SFED Social Forestry and Extension Division TFD Territorial Forest Division Tshogpa Chiwog Head (elected) Zomdue Village meeting 4 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1. Background Community forestry (CF) is a fast growing movement in Bhutan. Since 2002, the Participatory Forest Management Project (PFMP), which is funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and implemented by the Social Forestry and Extension Division (SFED) and HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation, has contributed significantly to the development of community forestry in Bhutan. Phase II (2007-2013) of the project aims to contribute to the improvement of rural livelihoods by empowering local communities to manage forests resources allocated to them as community forests on a sustainable basis. The project focuses on three main outcomes: 1) an enabling environment for the establishment of community forests throughout the country, 2) capacities built at all levels for effective and sustainable implementation of the community forestry programme and 3) a contribution to poverty reduction through community forestry. The present case study is based on interviews with CFMG in three Dzongkhags, discussions with Dzongkhag Forestry Officers, Gewog Forestry Extension Officers, SFED and PFMP staff and a review of existing literature1. The objective of the case study is to assess the evolution of CF in Bhutan, the limitations and potentials of CF, the role of CFMG in local governance and the contribution of the project to enhancing their capacities to play a more active role as planners and managers of CF. Therefore, CFMG are assessed in the wider context of the decentralisation process and the level of participation of other non-state actors in local governance. The CFMG’s capacities to voice concerns and demands on behalf of their members and to hold the respective authorities accountable are also considered. A context analysis of power relations within and beyond the forestry sector that impact the development of CFMG provides the overall framework for this study. 2. Context and Power Analysis Community Forestry in Bhutan Community forest is government-owned forest land, for which communities – organised as Community Forest Management Groups (CFMG) – are being granted management and use rights and responsibilities under conditions set out in a management plan approved by the Department of Forests and Park Services (DoFPS). CF is part of the broader concept of Social Forestry, which emerged in Bhutan through a royal decree in 1979. It can be seen as a paradigm shift away from the formerly highly restricted access to forests and use of forest resources for local communities. During the early days of CF in the late 1990s, the DoFPS and TFDs only very reluctantly ceded management rights and responsibilities for forest resources to CFMG. They preferred to register degraded land as CF, stating their concerns regarding the groups’ abilities to sustainably manage forest resources.2 The fact that the sharing of monitoring responsibilities for community forestry between TFD/Parks and SFED/DzFS has led to a relative gain in power of DzFS compared to TDF/Parks might be another reason for TFDs’ reservations towards community forestry. Fuelled by the accelerated democratisation and decentralisation process since 2008, there has been a rapid expansion of community forests in recent years. As per the end of June 2012, there were 431 community forests covering 43,166 ha and benefiting 19’559 households.3 Today, about one fourth of all rural households in Bhutan are member of a CFMG. Whereas in the early days community forestry was promoted mostly to ensure the conservation and protection of forest resources, it is now widely recognised as a means to improve the livelihoods of rural communities by 1 See p. 7 for an illustration of the Local Government and Forestry Sector Structure. 2 Such discussions revolved around the optimal use of forest resources, i.e. scientific management by professional foresters versus community management based on local knowledge. These discussions continue to date and tend to undermine the socio-economic importance of CF for rural communities. 3 CF database maintained by SFED 5 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ generating income. Its contribution to the realisation of the 10th Five Year Plan (FYP) national goal of poverty reduction is also acknowledged. Also, it is seen as a way to promote participatory decision- making on natural resource management and democratisation. As defined in the Forest and Nature Conservation Rules (FNCR) of 2006, CFMG are accountable to the DoFPS for the sustainable management of the entrusted resources, and the DoFPS have the right to revoke the certificate of a CFMG, if a group acts in violation of the management plan (with no redress rights for the CFMG).4 This is a clear indicator of power relations between CFMGs as right holders of forest management and the DoFPS representing the state as the owner of the resource. Nevertheless, the DoFPS has not exercised this prerogative so far (SFED 2012). Community Forest Management Groups and Civil Society Organisations Movement The Civil Society Organisations (CSO) movement in Bhutan gained momentum with the CSO Act 2007 and the establishment of a CSO Authority in 2009. Most of the 295 registered CSO are social welfare oriented and complement government activities, as foreseen by the act. Very few engage in advocacy and policy dialogue on behalf of their beneficiaries, and those who do cover mostly non- sensitive topics such as education and health. This development illustrates the cautious approach the CSO Authority has taken to enable the growth of CSO. Whereas the CSO Act covers not-for profit organisations (either for mutual or public benefit), community-based organisations (CBO) and groups pursuing primarily economic goals such as CFMG or farmers groups fall under the Co-operative Act of Bhutan. Whereas the socio-economic benefits of such CBO are acknowledged and appreciated and their potential to promote democratisation recognised, their empowerment in political terms has received little attention.6 The SFED for example highlights the impact of CFMG on social capital in Bhutan, e.g. strengthening social cohesion amongst members thereby effectively contributing to reversing social fragmentation